
Needless to say, I think the current prohibition on marijuana use, possession, and production is wrong. I don't want just medical marijuana legalized. I don't want a limit on what amounts we are allowed to own for personal use. I don't want it given the same status as tobacco and alcohol: heavily taxed and heavily regulated. Nothing less than complete decriminalization will satisfy me.
I recognize that there are negative economic consequences that come with the banning of any product. I also understand the "need" aspect of the medical marijuana lobby's argument. But they really don't compare to my one simple requirement: that I not be treated as the property of the government - as a slave - by their demands that I not ingest what it deems harmful to me and society.
Others can bitch back and forth about the actual harm ingesting marijuana causes (and I think the pro-legalization side has the data to support them), but that just cedes the moral ground to the state. It assumes it has the right to prohibit harmful products as long as some ultimately arbitrary level of harm can be generalized over an entire population. That assumption is what needs to be attacked and attacked without quarter.
ATTENTION: Comments are closed. You are viewing my old blog, archived for search engine purposes.
To view the new blog, please go to the homepage. To find the current version of this entry, search here.
Happy 420, Drizz.
I'm a whacky Anarchist/Capitalist type. I believe in laws but not taxation. If groups of people want to get together and say "We don't want prostitutes in our neighborhood." and everyone agrees then that seems entirely suitable to me. Some people have moral/religious convictions that are similar to other people's, if such people band together and live together agreeably I see no need to protest the idea of laws governing behavior (So long as the laws are voluntary). Then again, if someone moves and wants to sell his property the new occupant must obey the laws that the previous tenant agreed to. This situation leads me to believe that Anarchy, at least as I see it, is totally out of sync with how people want to live. Not everything can always be put into the boxes: "Damages someone's property" or "Doesn't damage anyone's property". Likewise, some people advocate smoking marijauna and some people, most in America (me thinks), disagree with the use.
In the end, Market Anarchy might be the ideal for some, but for others a state is required to keep living conditions, within geographical borders, at the terms originally agreed upon.
What the hell am I talking about? I completely didn't write what I intended to. Enjoy this beautiful day, Drizz.
Posted by: somasoul on April 20, 2005 01:05 PMAssuming the property the hooker would need to tread upon to ply her trade is part of that No Hooker Association, then I'm with ya.
I think most people are utterly confused and self-contradictory on how they want to live. The admirable and justified fire of "just leave me alone!" is regularly doused with the watery demands of "but the jobless pregnant foreigner of four needs a home!" When most people can recognize the train-into-the-mountain logic of holding those two thoughts, I'll be more charitable towards them.
Until then, I'll be sitting over here, grimly pecking away at the keyboard, promoting a system 99.9999% of the world thinks is sheer lunacy. :)
Posted by: Drizz on April 20, 2005 02:11 PMtoday was the best day i was so high its the best holiday of the year and its better than any other holiday
Posted by: splooge on April 20, 2006 11:45 AM